pass | a simple password storage system | Identity Management library

If you'd like to create a method in your class I suggest you can use the following.

The difference in behaviour can be accounted for by this behaviour, described in (for instance) the following note in ECMAScript 2022 Language Specification sect 14.3.2.1:

NOTE: If a VariableDeclaration is nested within a with statement and the BindingIdentifier in the VariableDeclaration is the same as a property name of the binding object of the with statement's object Environment Record, then step 5 will assign value to the property instead of assigning to the VariableEnvironment binding of the Identifier.

In the first case:

Since, I am not 100% sure the context in which you are trying to apply the MVC pattern, a good generic explanation of MVC can be found in GoF's 1995 book, Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object Oriented Software.

In the book, they state the following.

The Model is the application object, the View is its screen presentation, and the Controller defines the way the user interface reacts to user input.

A more robust explanation can be found from Martin Fowler where he also makes the case for a variation of Model View Controller that uses a Presentation Model.

If you are referring to Spring MVC then there is some magic that blurs the lines a bit. But in general, you have a controller that represents some screen or an encapsulated piece of functionality that the user (web requests) interact with. The controller serves up responses that are derived from the domain, usually via a Spring Service (i.e. @Service). The domain (Model) doesn't know anything about the View and the View may or may not know anything about the domain.

Given that, the View should be derived from the Model. But that's not always the case since sometimes how we present things to a screen is not the best logical way to model things in our domain - not to mention, the domain should be presentation agnostic. This leads into Fowler's argument for a Presentation Model, which is a model that belongs to the Presentation.

I call this a Presentation Model because it's a model that is really designed for and thus part of the presentation layer.

Microsoft took that idea and ran with it in a variant of MVC called MVVM (Model View ViewModel).

You can read more about that in Microsoft's documentation on ASP.Net Core.

So, back to your original question of "Should you pass the model directly to the view?" If you are using MVC then the controller is what provides the interaction. But if you're really asking, "Can you bind your view directly to the model?" If your model has all the stuff you need organized how your view needs it, then sure. And if it's simple enough, maybe that's the way to go. Otherwise, you could go with something like a Presentation Model or MVVM.

I don't believe you can use SharedPreferences within an Isolate without support for MethodChannel / accessing platform-specific underlying OS frameworks on iOS / Android.

You would need to use FlutterIsolate or a similar package to provide that support.

chunhunghan has a good answer detailing this.

Alternatively, you could run the crypt.generateKeys() by itself in your Isolate.spawn() call and use the results after in a separate method accessing SharedPreferences. (Assuming that crypt package is also not relying on platform-specific code.)

Seems like you already have the part where you are extracting the attachments. Try this code to retrieve the body of a multipart email.

You may have to figure out how to merge your part with this one.

yarn and npm already do this job, why not use them?

Tag the dev versions when you release them

You shouldn't necessarily have to implement a full custom atomic API, it should actually be safe to simply pull out a pointer to the underlying data from the atomic and pass it to the system.

Since std::atomic does not offer some equivalent of native_handle like other synchronization primitives offer, you're going to be stuck doing some implementation-specific hacks to try to get it to interface with the native API.

For the most part, it's reasonably safe to assume that first member of these types in implementations will be the same as the T type -- at least for integral values ^[1]. This is an assurance that will make it possible to extract out this value.

... and casting std::atomic to u/int* is UB

I finally found the solution to the problem: